L. Erikson et al. / Coastal Engineering 52 (2005) 285302
299
0.6
1
0.9
0.5
0.8
C1
B8
0.7
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.5
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Time (s)
Time (s)
1.6
1
1.4
B9
B10
1.2
0.8
1
0.6
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0
0
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Time (s)
Time (s)
Fig. 10. Measured (dashed lines) and simulated (solid lines) run-up lengths without swash interaction. (N.B. Vertical scale differs between
panels).
The potential for swash interaction can be
checked theoretically by comparing Eq. (12) with
the incident wave period. Table 3 lists the results
using u0 calculated with measured yhu and yhb,
2.4
maximum wave height at the SWS, and the friction
2.2
C1
factor, f, calculated with Eq. (7). The total swash
2.0
B8
duration is nearly twice the incident wave period for
1.8
B9
the cases with tanb=0.07, suggesting a high degree of
B10
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
Table 2
0.8
Comparison of measured and simulated run-up
0.6
Case
xmm
With swash interaction
Without swash interaction
0.4
(m)
xmc
%
rmse
xmc
%
rmse
0.2
(m)
Error
(m)
(m)
Error
(m)
0.0
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
C1
0.58
0.59
2
0.13
0.61
5
0.12
δ h b δ hu
2
B8
0.58
0.57
0.05
0.91
57
0.26
2
B9
0.49
0.48
0.11
1.06
116
0.38
Fig. 11. Sensitivity of run-up length to changes in the relative
B10
0.72
0.77
7
0.17
1.56
117
0.61